Current Events > Beat all the Halo campaigns recently. My thoughts *spoilers*

(+) Yeah! (+)

Beat them all over the pandemic recently. My ranking based on how I feel rn:
Reach > 1 > 3 > 2 >= 4 > 5 > ODST

Reach: This game has the best balance of story incorporation in the series, imo. The characters are given just enough personality and screen time without getting too annoying or excessive, especially when you get past the beginning areas of the game. And the stakes feel very real, partly because you actually lose (which, believe or not, I didn't know the first time I played). It also introduced the DMR and the Needle Rifle: two of my favorite guns in the series. Good level design, interesting setpieces, good stories, and surprisingly good looking in the MCC graphics wise, even with the post FX glitches. The biggest downside to this game is probably no Flood, but I think its strength make up for it. That, and a few hamfisted moments like when Kat gets sniped.

1: Tbh, I have a bias for first games in a series. I'm not sure why it is, but where people usually prefer sequels, I will usually prefer the first, probably because I played it first. Halo:CE is surprisingly fun to play to this day, with pretty well paced missions, good gunplay, a decent variety of weapons, and a decent variety of vehicles. Then you have the two very different situations of fighting the Covenant vs. fighting the Flood, which helps mix things up. Its biggest blemish is definitely the bad level (you know which one), which feels like it's practically trolling you with how long and samey it is (and I think that feeling was intentional).

3: This might be the first Halo game I played. This game absolutely floored me when it was new: beautiful visuals, a crazy sense of scale with the Scarab fight, cool vehicles (the Brute bike thing was my favorite as a kid), fun levels, etc. The whole "finish the fight" theme rang strong in this one. I think the campaign successfully establishes a "this is the end" sort of vibe with the Gravemind taking over High Charity and taking down the super Halo. Absolutely love the ending as well. That being said, Halo 3's campaign is a bit short compared to the first, despite being more bombastic and grand in scale, and I kind of like the "feel"/"fun factor" more in the first game. In all honestly, all these rankings are pretty closely clustered if I were to give them a score.

2: 2 does have some cool stuff, like the introduction of the Brutes, the introduction of dual wielding, plus it was kinda neat to play as the Arbiter (although I think his missions were notably weaker than MCs). And it brought in one of my favorite guns: the Brute plastma rifle. It's a great campaign, but compared to 1 and 3 it just doesn't click as well. I might be wrong on this, but levels in this game felt smaller/"tighter" than 1 or 3, and I think this hurt the fun factor for me. Plus I don't think I was super interested in the Covenant politics, so that may have hindered my enjoyment of the story.

4: If you can get past the "wtf did they do to Cortana?" vibe, as well as the "you are the culmination of advanced calculations from an ancient race, main character!" story beats, Halo 4 offers a pretty fun campaign that fits reasonably well in the series. The Prometheans as enemies are pretty fun, and all their weapons feel great. Their biggest issue is honestly that they're not the Flood, and those little flying guys are annoying as fuck. But it still delivers on solid setpieces like the Mammoth tank or going around in the Mantis. And while there are some dumb elements to the story, I like that it tried to capture that "mystery" vibe of the first game where MC stumbles upon something ancient and powerful. The personal stakes were a nice addition as well, fleshing out MC/Cortana's relationship. But I personally don't like the rampancy storyline, and wish this aspect didn't involved changing Cortana into basically a totally different character. I also think the Didact was a decent villain; intelligent, malevolent, imposing.

5: This game gets a lot of things wrong. It is the biggest departure in terms of enemy and level design, where the game seems to be about large shootboxes where you mow down enemies before proceeding. There are a lot of missteps in the story, partly because this game in many ways almost feels like it belongs more in the EU than the main game series. Curious to know what Spartan Locke was doing during Halo 5? Read this interesting side book! They should have done a much better job with Chief's story, and probably centered it around the Didact rather than jobbing that guy in a comic book. It's still a decent campaign for a FPS though, but it's certainly the least "Halo" game.

ODST: It's okay, probably like a 6/10. This one really is "wanna know what some random ODSTs were doing in Halo 2? Also a computer brain alien." I think a lot of this comes down to how much you enjoy walking around the city at night and finding clues/audio logs. I personally found it a little boring at times, and while the flashback missions were fun, they were also extremely brief until the end game. I feel like a lot of what this game tried to accomplish (getting you invested in a squad of soldiers that aren't MC, feeling the despair/anxiety associated with a Flood invasion, expand on interesting areas of UNSC lore like ONI) is imply done better in Reach. That's probably part of why this game ranks so low for me: everything I like about it was just outclassed by Reach.

Anyway, those are my "brief" thoughts on each game. Anybody want to talk about Halo campaigns?

---

If your curious about Wars and Wars 2, I've only played Wars and I'd put it last for that wack ass base building. I don't really remember the story that well, but I thought humans discovering Flood 20 years before or whatever before Halo was dumb.

---

2 > 3 > 1 > Reach > ODST > 4 > 5

I agree with a lot of your points, with the exception of your opinion on ODST. I think that's a bit too harsh of a take on it.

---

GeneralKenobi85 posted...

2 > 3 > 1 > Reach > ODST > 4 > 5

I agree with a lot of your points, with the exception of your opinion on ODST. I think that's a bit too harsh of a take on it.

Idk, I just didn't have that much fun playing it until the last few missions. And a lot of the dialogue felt a little too cheesy for me. They were going for more of a Saturday morning cartoon kinda vibe, and it just didn't gel with me.

---

Halo is trash

---

1NfamousACE_2 posted...

Halo is trash

Tell that to The Covenant.

(I love all the cheesy one liners in Halo 2)

---

YellowSUV posted...

Tell that to The Covenant.

(I love all the cheesy one liners in Halo 2)

I need a weapon

---

3>2>Reach>1>4>>>>>>>>5

I loved pretty much everything about the Reach campaign except the gameplay, it just never clicked for me like the rest of the games for some reason

---

Now go play them all on legendary and see if your opinion changes. I've been going back and playing them on legendary so I think my views are slightly different in some ways.

I mostly felt the same about Halo 1 and I do feel that it has the most balanced weapon sandbox even though there are only two precision weapons in the game. Pretty much every weapon is usable on Legendary although the pistol is your bread and butter.

I just recently beat 2 on legendary and it's honestly a unfair game in a lot of ways. Weapons are weaker and you're weaker too. You do get the battle rifle and carbine but all the other weapons save for the snipers and rockets are weak. SMG is useless and the Plasma rifle takes too long to strip. You can tell the game wasn't balanced in some ways. Sniper Jackals being unfair and level design not promoting variety. If the game was balanced more id consider it easier then 1, maybe because it's shorter tbh. Also the shotgun sucks in this one, feels like you're shooting a nerd gun while CE felt perfect.

Been while since I beat reach on Legendary but from what I remember the game was insane but more fair then 2. All the enemies felt super strong but I don't remember too well how useful all the weapons are besides the obvious plasma pistol DMR combo.

No opinion on 3 since I'm playing it next and I've never beaten it solo on legendary. Never played 4 or 5 at all either.

AngelsNAirwav3s posted...

3>2>Reach>1>4>>>>>>>>5

I loved pretty much everything about the Reach campaign except the gameplay, it just never clicked for me like the rest of the games for some reason

I think in many ways the mission structure is a lot more "get orders, follow the way point, activate/ destroy object." Technically all the Halos are like that, but the others do things to obfuscate this or have entire levels centered around a single goal rather than being led by the nose to many small ones. Whereas Reach is "go disable these AA guns! Now go help these guys! Now go press this Covenant!" I think it's less interesting than something like the first game, where things are structured around one big goal per level, and things just sort of get in the way of that. Idk if I explained that very well.

So if you're not invested into the story scenario, it's probably a lot less interesting.

---

Jshipp24 posted...

Now go play them all on legendary and see if your opinion changes. I've been going back and playing them on legendary so I think my views are slightly different in some ways.

Ngl, I usually just don't enjoy playing shooters at really high difficulty. Heroic is a high as I'll go in Halo. Legendary would just be an exercise in frustration for me. Third person action games are where I really like high difficulty.

---

Story

2>>Reach>>>1=3>>ODST>>>>4>>>>>>>>>>5

Gameplay

Reach>3>>>>1>2 (I forgot the campaign gameplay for ODST, 4, and 5 so no ranking those)


---

Jabodie posted...

I think in many ways the mission structure is a lot more "get orders, follow the way point, activate/ destroy object." Technically all the Halos are like that, but the others do things to obfuscate this or have entire levels centered around a single goal rather than being led by the nose to many small ones. Whereas Reach is "go disable these AA guns! Now go help these guys! Now go press this Covenant!" I think it's less interesting than something like the first game, where things are structured around one big goal per level, and things just sort of get in the way of that. Idk if I explained that very well.

So if you're not invested into the story scenario, it's probably a lot less interesting.

Yeah it does. Even from the top of my head I can remember the primary objectives

• Flee the Pillar of Autumn
• Find the stranded marines and regroup on Halo
• Rescue Captain Keyes
• Find and activate the Cartographer
• Find the Control Room
• Find the secret of Halo
• Access the Library (I think this was to find out the purpose of Halo to stop the Flood?)
• Sabotage the control room to stop it from being activated
• Find Captain Keyes again to find the thing to blow up the Pillar of Autumn
• Blow up the Pillar of Autumn to destroy Halo

I don't think I can remember the other ones in the same way.

---

Jshipp24 posted...

Now go play them all on legendary and see if your opinion changes. I've been going back and playing them on legendary so I think my views are slightly different in some ways.

I mostly felt the same about Halo 1 and I do feel that it has the most balanced weapon sandbox even though there are only two precision weapons in the game. Pretty much every weapon is usable on Legendary although the pistol is your bread and butter.

I just recently beat 2 on legendary and it's honestly a unfair game in a lot of ways. Weapons are weaker and you're weaker too. You do get the battle rifle and carbine but all the other weapons save for the snipers and rockets are weak. SMG is useless and the Plasma rifle takes too long to strip. You can tell the game wasn't balanced in some ways. Sniper Jackals being unfair and level design not promoting variety. If the game was balanced more id consider it easier then 1, maybe because it's shorter tbh. Also the shotgun sucks in this one, feels like you're shooting a nerd gun while CE felt perfect.

Been while since I beat reach on Legendary but from what I remember the game was insane but more fair then 2. All the enemies felt super strong but I don't remember too well how useful all the weapons are besides the obvious plasma pistol DMR combo.

No opinion on 3 since I'm playing it next and I've never beaten it solo on legendary. Never played 4 or 5 at all either.

In my opinion, Halo 3 is the most fair game on Legendary if you're playing solo. As you said, Halo 2 is complete bullshit. The Jackal Snipers are the primary reason, but they're not the only one. It just has some incredibly difficult sections, and you die very quickly to the majority of enemies. Halo 1 is mostly fair, but just genuinely difficult throughout. Same with Reach.

Halo 3 is great though. You'll feel confident against most enemies and encounters, but at the same time you can't just sleepwalk through it and be fine. Or at least that didn't work for me. And Halo 3 has no truly standout difficult sections in my opinion. There are some missions that are tougher than others, but usually not by very much.

---

IMO:

1 > 2 > ODST = 3 > Reach > 4 >>>>>>>>>> 5

With that said, I think Halo 3 actually aged the best out of the first four.


---

I think you're the only person I've ever seen call prometheans fun

---

Have you played any of the Halo Wars games or the other spin-offs? If so how do you like those?

Tobi011 posted...

Have you played any of the Halo Wars games or the other spin-offs? If so how do you like those?

I've only played the first Wars game back when it came out. I wasn't a big fan of the campaign because it felt like an extended tutorial. All the maps were weirdly linear and the game told you how to win every map, and there were no like no options when it came to base building. Idk, it was a weird game to me.

---

Halo Wars 2 might still not be your jam but I dunno. I liked it. Mission variety was good. Felt like you never really had more than two missions of the same scenario. It is easy and pretty linear though. You gradually unlock the late game stuff in the latter half of the campaign. I haven't played the DLC but I heard it was good.

Those FMV cutscenes are fantastic at the very least so it's worth a watch on YouTube. The Banished seem relevant to Halo Infinite so it's probably worth watching the one that explains them at least.

---

If I ever come across a copy I'll probably give it a play, but after the first I wasn't in a big rush to play the sequel

---

Jabodie posted...

If your curious about Wars and Wars 2, I've only played Wars and I'd put it last for that wack ass base building. I don't really remember the story that well, but I thought humans discovering Flood 20 years before or whatever before Halo was dumb.

Did you beat the game? I didn't and should get back to playing if it's still on Game Pass but that isn't as much of an issue that you think it is.

---

I didn't know people existed that put the Halo 3 campaign above the Halo 2 campaign. 3's campaign just felt so lifeless to me compared to 2's. But hey, I respect the opinion. Now for online, I think there's a real argument for 3>2, but I still prefer 2 for the online as well.

---

Banana_Cyanide posted...

Did you beat the game? I didn't and should get back to playing if it's still on Game Pass but that isn't as much of an issue that you think it is.

I did. It isn't very long or difficult, and I was a big enough fan to keep going even if I didn't think it was super good. Plus I was still a teenager. And which issue? The story or the base building?

NightMarishPie posted...

I didn't know people existed that put the Halo 3 campaign above the Halo 2 campaign. 3's campaign just felt so lifeless to me compared to 2's. But hey, I respect the opinion. Now for online, I think there's a real argument for 3>2, but I still prefer 2 for the online as well.

My buddy thinks 2 is the best in the series. Something I kinda don't like about 3 is the lack of Cortana through a lot of it, though. 3 has now nostalgia factor as well, because I played it with my brother. 2 is also the only one I didn't actually play until I was over 20 years old, aside from 5. The gravity hammer also might be the most fun weapon in the series for me.

---

Jabodie posted...

And which issue? The story or the base building?

The story and considering how it ended encountering the Flood 20 years before Halo:CE is kind of a moot point.

Actually did you play Halo Wars 2?

---

Banana_Cyanide posted...

The story and considering how it ended encountering the Flood 20 years before Halo:CE is kind of a moot point.

Actually did you play Halo Wars 2?

No. Is it better? Gameplay wise I mean.

---

No but if you want to know why the flood plot point is HW is a moot one it's because in HW2 the crew of the ship whose name I can't remember never made it back to human civilization, in fact they arrive a couple of years after Halo 3 to the Lesser Ark and fight the covenant forces that got left behind.

I won't spoil how HW2 ends but it does tie in to Halo 5 and most likely Infinite.

---

Banana_Cyanide posted...

No but if you want to know why the flood plot point is HW is a moot one it's because in HW2 the crew of the ship whose name I can't remember never made it back to human civilization, in fact they arrive a couple of years after Halo 3 to the Lesser Ark and fight the covenant forces that got left behind.

I won't spoil how HW2 ends but it does tie in to Halo 5 and most likely Infinite.

I'm not really complaining that much from a lore or continuity perspective, but everything felt kinda pointless playing it because I knew they'd have to wrap things up tightly and kill everybody so that the Flood would be new to humans. It's almost baked into the premise. At least we got to play around a bit with SPARTAN units though. This all probably would have been fine if I liked the characters more, though. It's kinda like ODST in that way.

---